Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, May 8, 1993 TAG: 9305080220
SECTION: SPORTS PAGE: C1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DOUG DOUGHTY STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
UVa was held accountable for only those activities that occurred during a four-year period starting May 17, 1987. Thirty-six of 45 loans made by the Virginia Student Aid Foundation to student-athletes occurred before that date.
"I would say that the statute has applied 95 percent of the time," said UVa history professor Alan Williams, who was chairman of the infractions committee when his term expired in September. "I can remember cutting off some really serious offenses.
"To have an exception, it can't just be willful or have a pattern. [The violations] must have a willful pattern. There has to be a designed purpose to get around the rules."
Williams said the four-year statute of limitations was established during an overhaul of the penalty system in 1985.
"There had been previous statutes of limitations," he said, "but this was a way to get things manageable. For a long time there was a theory of accumulation. People thought the enforcement staff kept a file and stored away little tidbits until they had a big box and then [the committee] lowered the boom."
Williams admits there is a growing segment, headed by the Pacific 10 Conference, that believes the infractions committee has gone soft.
"When the changes were made in 1985, I don't think people thought the presidents would get hold of their athletic departments the way they have," Williams said. "A lot of people - and not just Virginia - are doing a better job of reporting and cooperating with the NCAA."
UVa was placed on two-year probation and was docked two scholarships in football for each of the next two years. In addition, the football program will lose one of its two graduate assistants in one of the next two seasons.
"I don't think they received a light penalty for what they did," David Swank, chairman of the infractions committee, said. "Under NCAA rules we have to pay attention to [the degree of cooperation]. If we don't, the next school would say, `Why should we bother?'
"This was not a loan program where they were loaning student-athletes a tremendous sum of money [averaging $340 between 1987-91]. In my own mind, that was one of the factors considered."
There were critics of the ruling and then there were just plain critics.
"After all the news broke out about the loans to the athletes, I started realizing why it was so difficult recruiting against Virginia," said Florida coach Steve Spurrier, who was head coach at Duke from 1987-89. "They signed a lot of players we both went after back in the late '80s and so forth."
Although the 13 violations against Virginia were on a wide spectrum, there was no mention of recruiting improprieties.
"It [the penalty] was about the only way the committee could go," said Steve Horton, assistant athletic director in charge of compliance at Virginia Tech. "There were no recruiting violations involved, so they couldn't really take away any [recruiting] visits."
It was Horton's guess earlier this week that Virginia would lose scholarships, "but I didn't really think about the graduate assistant," he said.
"Realistically, I would say it will probably go the same way when our cross-country case comes up in June. There was one recruiting violation, but the rest were special benefits."
Football was the only UVa program to receive sanctions, but there were other teams mentioned in the infractions committee report. The report referred to a $25,000 check from the Virginia Student Aid Foundation to ex-basketball coach Terry Holland in 1987 that was viewed as an "improper salary supplement."
"The inquiry's group's sense was that the money was properly paid to Coach Holland and that it was a bookkeeping problem," said Peter Low, associate dean of the UVa law school and chairman of the committee that prepared Virginia's report.
Although there were six loans to basketball players, the last transaction was in August 1984.
"We've had to deal with it," said head basketball coach Jeff Jones, referring to negative publicity, "but we've been pretty confident all along that there wouldn't be any penalty affecting the basketball program.
"I don't think the probation will affect any of the programs, competitively speaking. There's more a sense of embarrassment or disappointment than anything else, although I was surprised at the reduction in scholarships [for football]."
Men's soccer coach Bruce Arena, whose three-time national champions were not mentioned in either UVa's self-report or the infractions committee findings, shared Jones' thoughts.
"I think it was anticlimactic for the most part," Arena said. "I thought the penalties for the football team were a little harsher than I expected, but I don't have all the facts.
"I thought, when you looked at what [VSAF's] intentions were, we deserved a slap on the wrist. Maybe we got slapped twice."
by CNB